Why Government Fear-Stirring COVID Advertising Should Pull Statistics

When I first saw it Reaper advertising campaign since 1987, I was an adult, and I was warned. Nevertheless, it was incredibly painful. Growing up in Australia and seeing as a kid, my family, friends and colleagues never forgot about it, even though it only aired on TV for three weeks.

Although unforgettable, it has won awards in the advertising industry, but the positive impact of advertising from a public health perspective is considered minimal. Australia has responded extraordinarily to the HIV / AIDS campaign, which is important bipartisan support for HIV / AIDS prevention and the federal government’s sustainable funding for services at the state and community levels. By offer. These successful programs were characterized by a clear engagement with the affected communities and a response directed to the needs of the community.

When I studied for a master’s degree in public health, these programs were listed as examples of gold standard public health responses that have significantly changed the course of public health. HIV / AIDS epidemic in Australia.. The Grim Reaper ad, on the other hand, was taught as causing harm from portraying the disease and contributing to the stigma of gay men in particular.

The new ad for COVID-19 has some similarities to the Grim Reaper campaign. It has been introduced without warning and contains vigilant and potentially inaccurate footage of sick patients struggling to breathe in hospital beds. As the number of cases in New South Wales continued to grow, it suddenly appeared on television screens and social media feeds. Obviously, it’s designed to shock and create horror, perhaps hoping that this will motivate people to stay home and get vaccinated.

In the surprise of advertising, it is unexpected that the previous rhetoric that vaccination is “not racial” presents the urgent urgency of being vaccinated as soon as possible so that we all do not die. It is a rhetoric of. The vaccination does not seem to be embarrassingly considered, as it is not yet available to many, including the patients depicted in the ad.

There are many other criticisms. First, it is painful and rude to the medical community to suggest that patients are left to suffer in this way. Kate Gregolevich is a geriatrician who took care of many elderly patients with COVID-19 during the wave of infection in Melbourne last year. She has previously written about many things healthcare professionals have done to support sick patients. From holding hands and laughing with your eyes to providing medicine to help with shortness of breath. And other support measures.. Looking at this ad, many healthcare professionals know that they are disappointed, afraid, and suffering from this patient-only portrayal. This is not the care they will work hard to endanger, provide, or give their lives in the future.

Second, attacking them with images suggesting that this is the way their loved ones spent their last days and time, and this is the way they died, loves with COVID-19. It is incredibly painful and rude to many lost families. Not only did many Australians lose their families in Australia, but many more Australians lost their families abroad. Even if borders are not a barrier, infection prevention and control means that many people cannot be with their loved ones in the hospital, and their last moments are left to the imagination. The author of this ad wonders how common this trauma and grief is in reality, despite the fact that one-third of Australians were born abroad, where the effects of the pandemic are far more widespread and tragic. Is clearly misunderstood.

Also, disregarding the trauma of infected and those who have recovered from infection, infected patients have left home or are still vaccinated, even though a significant number of Australians are essential workers. It suggests that there is some negligence because it is not. Those who cannot work from home and / or who have not yet been vaccinated for various reasons.

Apart from potential harm, there is a question as to whether fear-based public health campaigns are effective. Dr. Gregolevich is currently spending a considerable amount of time counseling patients who are vaccinated but have not yet booked vaccination. She has a deep understanding of why people continue to hesitate to vaccinate. In her experience, she tells me that what people are looking for in these conversations is hope.

This seems to be understood by other governments. Singapore ads feature music, dance, and promises about what the world will look like with high immunization rates. Similarly, in France, as more people are vaccinated, their advertisements show a gradual opening of society. The UK has produced a comedy ad featuring celebrities that provide laughter and scientific peace of mind. Even the beer maker Heineken is producing joyful advertising.

Public health professionals and clinicians understand that fear has little motivation for behavioral change. At best, it’s very short-term, and in the worst case, people are too smart to be threatened. Good clinical practice, whether at the individual or group level, involves people, is honest, and targets individual needs and concerns.

Fear and shock campaigns can play a role, as we saw in graphic smoking cessation ads and the famous road safety ads after a car accident, but keep in mind that these ads didn’t exist on their own. Is important. Tobacco taxation and, to a lesser extent, plain packaging had a greater impact on lower smoking rates than graphic images and television ads on tobacco packages. Lower speed limits, improved vehicle safety features, black spot targeting, and a series of other road safety interventions have done much more to improve traffic safety than advertising for shocking injuries.

This doesn’t mean that ads are useless. Developed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders for sexual health education in their communities, Condoman was a huge success and is still in use decades later. The Australian HIV / AIDS response eventually advertised differently to people living in different Australian communities after a targeted local survey identified the key concerns and motives of each group of people. Did. Reaper is something most Australians remember, but it didn’t lead to behavioral or epidemic changes.

Similarly, multiple strategies and different advertisements may be required to better understand how to increase vaccination rates to address vaccine hesitation and complacency in different Australian demographic groups. There is. Use other proportional public health measures to temporarily limit the spread of the disease.

This ad is not an effective ad and may need to be withdrawn before it can cause any further harm.